People I'm following

Last 5 visitors

vkelman

Job could be done using any tools. But some tools help and guard developer towards good style, while some fight against. Web Forms belong to that latest category. A lot of unnecessary stuff which stands on the way, absolutely artificial event model, which has nothing to do with actual HTTP requests / responses. Chaos of code-behind pages and typical messy mix of presentation logic, business, and database access logic - which was promoted by Microsoft examples do not help further maintenance at all.
When I was maintaining an old classic ASP code and developing new modules using Web Forms, sometimes it felt more natural to use VbScript of classic ASP pages than to program Web Forms - at least classic ASP didn't dictate logic. To me, Web Forms is failed experiment. That's why more companies / developers move away of it, towards ASP.NET MVC and/or heavier client logic with more Ajax, JavaScript MVC libraries, SPAs, etc - with .NET only used to develop Web Services connecting to databases. Here's where .NET / C# excels and feels natural.

"But the hue and cry over Google's harmless mistake, with no abuse of the data involved in any way -- while genuine bad guys are still free to collect all of the unsecured Wi-Fi data that they wish for actual exploits -- strikes me as being exploitative behavior by many of the accusers involved." http://www.nnsquad.org/archives/nnsquad/msg04410....

It wasn't ill- or good mannered, it was a technical mistake which had nothing to do with ethics.
Besides taking Street View, they were collecting WiFi data to improve location services. "Payload" was an unfortunate by-product. Read something, please!

We'll see how big is actual problem for a Google, but in my personal opinion, it's not reality which is causing this, but under-the-hood interests of politics and/or competitors. In other countries politic atmosphere is different and "payload" matter is long closed.

P.S. I am Google fan and never used Apple products, but those antenna issues were much smaller than media presented it. In technical tests they didn't find increased drop calls, etc. (don't have links now)

Again, they used off-the-shelf app which they failed to sanitize. They admitted it. They even discovered it, if I'm not mistaken (an audit they ordered). Application which they did not design collected fractures of seconds of openly broadcast data along with WiFi information they were actually collecting for making location-based services to work more precise. It was an unfortunate mistake. Because of the following opposition raised by people who are making their living out of finding errors and inflating hysteria - hurting evolution of the Web - because of that opposition Google was forced not to use that WiFi data and make location services to work less precise. There was an investigation, and most of the countries already agreed that it was an unfortunate mistake. Still few alarmists like yourself trying to revive a half-dead sensation for mysterious purposes.

Do you know that application Google used to collect WiFi data wasn't even developed by them? Google bought an application and wasn't careful enough to check it in more details before using it. They never specifically extracted accidentally collected "payload" data and sure never used it. Don't you, who position yourself to be related to Chrome OS, understand that all that hysteria is initiated by Google's competitors but still hurts to WWW overall - and you are adding to that harm?